MICHAEL RISINIT
THE JOURNAL NEWS
Original publication: Feb. 08, 2001

CARMEL — Waldorf-Astoria. Ritz-Carlton. Hotel Carmel?

The third one is possible. Almost 61 percent of the Carmel voters who turned out
Tuesday approved selling town-owned property to a local developer with a desire
to build a luxury hotel and conference center on Route 6.

Once the Town Board decides on the price for its 19 acres — $1.15 million, $1
million or $750,000 — and other terms, such as the amount of land deeded back to
the town, developer Paul Camarda said he would begin presenting the property to
hotel chains.

The vote's outcome affirmed the Carmel Town Board's November decision to sell
Camarda the property on Route 6, north of the Putnam Plaza shopping center
where the town's salt shed sits. The referendum passed 2,119 to 1,358.

Those opposed to the sale maintained the vote was not a defeat, but a matter of
giving the people a say in the land's fate. In the months between the board's
decision and referendum day, the debate over the property shaped up as one
between pro-development and anti-development forces. What swayed voters,
some said, was a strong public relations effort by Camarda.

"He did have a (public relations) campaign, and I think it worked," said Ross
Weale, president of the Putnam County Economic Development Corporation,
which supported the project. "He invested time and commitment in this project and
good PR."

Both sides ran newspaper advertisements and tacked signs to utility poles around
town. Camarda, in pursuit of a "yes" vote, also mailed out a color brochure,
contacted voters by telephone and produced a lengthy question-and-answer
infomercial for cable television featuring a reporter from a local weekly
newspaper. The spot was aired virtually nonstop on the day of the vote.

"Advertising can help you or hurt you," Camarda said yesterday. "In this case, I
think I had a good message."

Advertising gets your message out and informs voters, especially for groups
seeking a "yes" vote, said Christine Wopat, an organizer of Families for an
Affordable Kent. The group successfully supported moving Kent's highway garage
in 1998 to make room for a proposed outlet center, a project that later folded.

"It's very easy to vote no because a 'no' vote takes no research," Wopat said. "On
a 'yes' vote, you have to think about it and what you're saying yes to."

Wopat's group spent about $7,000 on its advertising campaign.

Anthony Seda, a Carmel resident who helped organize opposition to the sale, said
"money talked" in Carmel.

"I've got to give him credit; (Camarda) spent a lot of money," Seda said. "He didn't
make any promises, though. He just said what he wanted to do."

Camarda has offered to build an in-line skating rink and playground and to connect
water and sewer to land given back to the town.

Carmel Supervisor Frank Del Campo said the board was leaning toward the option
that carried a $1 million price tag and gave the town 8 acres. According to the
deal's terms, he said, the town has a year to make a selection.

In a joint statement yesterday, County Executive Robert Bondi and county
Legislature Chairman Robert Pozzi, R-Mahopac, said they supported efforts for a
hotel.

Both sides need to file financial disclosure forms, said Robert Bennett, the county's
Democratic election commissioner, but neither has done so. Bennett said he
planned to write to the Town Board today in hopes it can identify who is behind
both pro- and anti-sale forces. Using that information, Bennett said, he will attempt
to get the parties to report how much money they spent on the referendum.

Seda said his side spent no more than $2,000, mainly from volunteers digging into
their own pockets for signs. He estimated that the developer spent $40,000.

Camarda called that figure "grossly exaggerated" but refused to provide even a
rough figure for his expenditures.

"If you don't put your money where your mouth is," Camarda said, "you're not
showing faith in your beliefs."